Talk:Osamu Tezuka

  This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ryz.lau.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I saw under the "Area(s)" heading of the side panel that "actor" is listed but there is no information pertaining to Osamu Tezuka having distinguished himself in this field within the body of the article. According to his IMDB page, he is not credited with having acted in anything. Thus, I ask, on the basis of what source is he being cited as an actor? Or for that matter, a pianist? I wouldn't know, but is he generally known for these things or are these just hobbies of his?--24.212.231.18 (talk) 02:46, 14 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

Archives

/Archive 1

There seems to be some confusion about what the external links section is for. It's not for sources, but for resources. It's a see also section for presenting links to resources on the web (external to Wikipedia). Popular (i.e., notable) news sites on the subject certainly qualify to be included. See Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided for a list of the types of links not to be posted there, and Wikipedia:External links#What should be linked for some guidelines on what should be linked. The Transhumanist    17:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

If there are List of Osamu Tezuka manga and List of Osamu Tezuka anime articles, can someone please tell me why this article needs a 5,900 word list of his works? Can't it just be narrowed down to, say, five to ten of his most notable? I understand that he wrote a lot of mangas/animes, but still... this is ridiculous. RobertM525 (talk) 09:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

you rocks!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.23.107.123 (talk) 07:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

allegedly racist depictions of African-Americans . OK, I have notice this is a common mistake coming from U.S. people, but according the source seems like the allegations of racist depictions involves black people in general, not just those from the United States.haha. just commenting. =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.202.13.250 (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Keeping in mind that the subject of the article is not American, it is fair to assume that any alleged racism is not toward African-Americans specifically, but to (I don't know what word to use that will not be offensive - is there a Wikipedia guideline?). (Vulture19 (talk) 04:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC))Reply

Maybe to "non-Japanese"? I don't think the intent of any such "depictions" would be deliberately meant to be "racist", per se, especially considering the endemic insularity of the Japanese culture.99.124.80.42 (talk) 15:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

"the content of Tezuka's work has met modern criticism for its allegedly racist depictions of black and southeast asian people, notably people from Vietnam"

Which book contain this theme about Southeast asian people ? Please show me the sources. Otherwise I will edit it. I 've read a lot

of Tezuka 's work and never seen this theme before. Make sure it not just some prank jokes

Vakyres (talk) 06:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The article source cites a blog entry which is a weird for me, especially as the blog entry in turn cites a wikipedia entry at this in particular. That source does seem to validate the paragraph in question to a degree but leaves out the context. If anything this paragraph seems one-sided as it skewed toward criticism of Tezuka as racist but those claims appear to only originate from one source whereas much of his work, Astroboy in particular, is well cited as anti-racist. I would delete that section or fully flesh it out with the full context for the racist allegations and include the contrary material. 98.64.242.215 (talk) 09:43, 29 August 2009 (UTC) usemasperReply

"Tezuka also loved the environment, especially insects, and wished that all humans would take care of it. His animation production company was named Mushi (insect) Production."

"Tezuka headed the animation production studio Mushi Production ("Bug Production"), which pioneered TV animation in Japan. The name of the studio derives from one of the kanji (虫) used to write his name."

So where does the name of the studio really come from? Both reference pages are unavailable.

Knodin (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Both his love of insects and his name. The [1] in his name has a meaning for insects. I see no conflict between the two statements the problem is with the source. Both statements reference the same source. I found it on the wayback machine, archived source appears to be a student paper for an upperdivision undergraduate japanese class. A quick skim through the paper doesn't refer to these statements, but i didn't look very hard. 98.64.242.215 (talk) 10:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC) usemasperReply

I was reading the biography section and the bit about Stanley Kubrick asking Tezuka to work on 2001: A Space Oddessey occured in January 2008, years after the dead of both. XD just throwing it out there. I am horrible at editing so I'll leave it to the masters of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.28.79.242 (talk) 06:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Dark Horse publishings of Astro Boy list Tezuka's death as 2nd February 1989 but it's listed as the 9th on wikipedia? Any confirmation that the 9th is correct or does this need to be updated? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.55.5 (talk) 05:56, 28 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

It was listed as both in the article, but I've sourced it to the 9th via a book source. The official english Tezuka page also has it as the 9th.[2] Dandy Sephy (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I would like to request full protection to help prevent spam.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Such requests should be made at WP:RFPP. {{editprotected}} is intended to request edits to articles that are already protected. It's no big deal though. I've had a look at the page history, and the link additions aren't a big enough problem to justify protection. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 23:46, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

There's a discussion on which comic-related articles should be listed as "Top Importance" on the importance scale, and I feel this article should not be included. If any user disagrees or wishes to contribute, please do so there. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Apparently he worked with Toei (but the only source I can find this on is on the Mushi Production article), did he do any important work like writing, directing, producing, character designing or was he just minor staff at that company? What Toei animes has he worked on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.105.29 (talk) 21:17, 12 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Cyberbot II has detected links on Osamu Tezuka which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://tezukainenglish.com/

  Triggered by \btezukainenglish\.com\b on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 06:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hello. Could someone please add a photo to Osamu Tezuka's article? I'm unable to do it myself. I suggest this photo to be used: http://www.upnorthgeorgia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Osamu-Tezuka.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agnos890 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 14 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

This Japan Tmes article claims that Tezuka was not a medical doctor, but rather earned a PhD leading to the confusion. It also directly calls out this article as wrong. Requires further looking into. Opencooper (talk) 08:27, 16 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

That's an interesting piece, but I think its premise is based on a misunderstanding. Tezuka did publish a Ph.D. dissertation in 1960 (or 61?), but that doesn't mean he had been pursuing a scholarly career all along rather than a clinical one. Rather, he had already completed medical school in 1951 - having gone into it fully intending to go into clinical practice, according to the well-known story of how he decided as a child to become a doctor and help people the way doctors had helped him. (The med school program he went into was an accelerated one specifically created to address a shortage of practicing doctors.) He then dropped that career goal and went into comics full-time; by 1960 he was very well established in the field (i.e., the Japan Times author's claim that Tezuka only "chose manga" after 1960 indicates an extreme unfamiliarity with Tezuka's career). But he still had an interest in science, and somehow found the time to pursue a post-graduate degree part-time - hence the dissertation. Here's a reference for all of the above: http://apjjf.org/-Yuki-Tanaka/3412/article.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.117.96.178 (talk) 21:47, 8 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Indeed the source backs up what you're saying. Thanks for clearing this up and doing the research. :) Opencooper (talk) 23:20, 8 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

There seem(ed) to be a ton of grammatical errors in the "Biography" section of the article, particularly a ton of unpunctuated run-on sentences and improper verb tenses (i.e. use of "would" and "could" and present tense for things Tezuka did decades ago). I tried to fix most of the ones I saw, but I'm sure some remain. V2Blast (talk) 08:15, 10 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

The opening blurb calls him an "activist" but the article contains no mention of any political activity whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.87.9.107 (talk) 18:29, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

I've removed it for now unless someone can substantiate the claim. I've also removed his being a medical doctor from the lead. Opencooper (talk) 14:58, 30 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

What is the standard for calling someone a doctor? He had a doctor's degree in medicine, his thesis was titled "A Microscopic Study of the Membrane Structure of Heterotypic Spermtids." I can't, however, find any indication he ever actually practiced medicine anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.87.9.107 (talk) 17:49, 2 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

It's not so much a question of whether he was considered a doctor, but rather reliable sources don't really refer to him as one and he's not known for it, so it doesn't warrant being given prominence in the lead. There are tons of biographies on Wikipedia where people of numerous professions are actually known for other things and their articles focus on those. Opencooper (talk) 15:29, 3 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Interesting discussion of his work in [3]. RS or not? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:49, 21 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

I request for a better profile picture to be added to this Wikipedia article. If not, explain why. I recommend this one: https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/scale_medium/3/38919/1031171-osamu_tezuka.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.235.147.210 (talk) 13:55, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Friendly reminder that Citation 11 is a dead link, linking to a main page and not the article. Try checking if the Wayback Machine has it, or remove it and mark it with a {cn}.

-FavoritoHJS (talk) 16:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm just looking at "Tezuka's complete oeuvre includes over 700 volumes, with more than 150,000 pages." and I have found that number mentioned in a lot of places, but I don't think people understand what it really means. Osamu Tezuka only lived to be 60 years old, just assuming he dedicated his entire life to the making manga and he started at the age of 10 we get the following; 150,000 pages / (50 years of work * 365 days in a year (he can take leap year days off)) = 8.22 pages a day. Now I'm sure to some people that seems acceptable but it isn't really possible. Modern artists with full staffs of assistants and writers often struggle to put out 20 pages a week (which is 20 * 52 = 1040 pages a year) so they would have to live over a hundred years to match Osamu Tezuka's output (Osamu Tezuka obviously had a lot of assistants, like Toshio Ban, but the number is still really big).

Looking at Kochira Katsushika-ku Kameari Kōen-mae Hashutsujo, it ran for 40 years and had 1,960 chapters at roughly 20 pages each chapter meaning (1,960 * 20 = 39,200 pages) yet somehow Osamu Tezuka produced more than 3x as many pages in ~1.25x the amount of time if you say he started at age 10.

So I looked for a complete list of his works and found http://tezukainenglish.com/wp/?page_id=443 which includes the statement "the Osamu Tezuka Complete Manga Works (tezuka osamu manga zenshū) edition by Kodansha has become the de facto standard in cataloging roughly 80,000 of the estimated 150,000 pages of manga produced by Tezuka during his lifetime." and by a quick counting of the total number of pages for each set it does ad up to roughly 80,000 pages. I just can't seem to find where the additional 70,000 pages come from. There are a few missing works from the set and of course the man drew works that were never published, used for film/tv production, gifts, etc. but that is a lot to just handwave. Seriously it's more than Kochira Katsushika-ku Kameari Kōen-mae Hashutsujo and One Piece combined being casually dismissed as lost to the aether.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful or anything, the output is insanely high and the quality is largely maintained, but >8 pages a day for 50 years is borderline impossible. It is fair to say he drew well over 80,000 pages but I can't find an actual reason to casually double the number.

The 150,000 number is likely possible if you include all the work he is listed as an author on; as spinoffs and alike from his works are very common and continue to cite him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coystags (talk • contribs) 02:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Late to the party but that's an interesting bit of research - they say "produced by", not "published by", so might it be because they included drafts and kid stuff, or written scripts that were not drawn by him ? The sentence "Tezuka's complete oeuvre includes over 700 volumes, with more than 150,000 pages." seems like an extrapolation compared to the tezukainenglish blurb. DommageCritique (talk) 06:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi everyone. I suggest to change the profile picture into another one that suits better. I recommend using this one: https://images.moviefit.me/p/o/102665-osamu-tezuka.jpg Could someone please do this? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.1.220.13 (talk) 13:48, 13 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

I still insist upon this topic. Could someone please take care of this? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.105.66.90 (talk) 16:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I answered on your talk page, since there were several articles with your same request. Netherzone (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Shndoe, could you explain what "citation linking issue" you were fixing with this edit? You have re-introduced an sfn multiple-target error which my edit (that you undid) fixed. The citation was correctly linked before your edit – the footnote links to the source that is cited. This is a standard way of doing references when there are multiple citations to the same source – see here for more details. Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 17:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

The reason was such a mysterious character in the beginning of the series is that he kept his past as an executive of the Port Mafia a secret from the Agency. They were shocked to learn the truth when they finally found 198.206.25.78 (talk) 13:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

That certainly clears the matter up... Wham2001 (talk) 16:38, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

I love anime 2A00:801:245:F4F5:5846:A751:FFD1:573D (talk) 13:23, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply